Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
... LastLast
  1. #61
    It sure is funny seeing all the TRUMP DOING 7D CHESS autism on both sides now.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dextroden View Post
    You are a carbon copy of what you long so hard to fight in the streets. An extremist. Someone so desperate for strife to prove you are the ubermensch, err, Real American.

    Alt lite. Sounds like you're having an alt fright. Unable to sleep at alt night. Maybe you should relax and fly an alt kite. Go down to the diner for an alt bite. You shouldn't be treating people with alt spite. Eventually, everything will be alt right.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Herradura View Post
    It sure is funny seeing all the TRUMP DOING 7D CHESS autism on both sides now.
    Does it make you one of the cool kids to throw a disability into every other post?

  3. #63
    Immortal jackofwind's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    7,878
    Proxy waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Because fuck you, that's why.

  4. #64
    I am Murloc!
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Baden-Wuerttemberg
    Posts
    5,367
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    I know what they are and I know where they are stationed. They are there because they have been upgraded to launch RIM-161s. Their main mission is ABM defense.
    A Burke nominally has 90 or 96 Mk41 cells depending on its Flight (a Tico has 122). They are not reloadable at sea. Those have to be allocated between SAMs, VLA, and TLAMs. Keep in mind, their primary mission is air defense, not land attack. Its a good bet the 59 missiles launched represented most, if not all, TLAMs on the two ships.
    Ok, nice info.
    if it was not their primary mission then it was just a chance used because the 2 vessels were in the right position, moved a bit closer and off the missiles went ? not much of a plan then.

  5. #65
    I'm glad to know you will never have a future USA is run by Illuminati and in 2001 there was a secret pentagon memo that said they will find a way to destroy 7 countries within a few years, Syria Iraq and Libya was on that list, all oil countries. CIA was behind the chemical attack. Look at the footage, also they don't even know what chemical it was.

    infracted - forbidden topics
    Last edited by Crissi; 2017-04-07 at 08:47 PM.

  6. #66
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Tonkaden View Post
    The Arleigh Burke class destroyers hold 56 tomahawks each... so out of the 112 they have, they only fired 59... barely over half.
    The mix of ordnance depends on the anticipated mission. The ABM ships are loaded for AAW and ABM more so than land attack.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by kenthovind View Post
    I'm glad to know you will never have a future USA is run by Illuminati and in 2001 there was a secret pentagon memo that said they will find a way to destroy 7 countries within a few years, Syria Iraq and Libya was on that list, all oil countries. CIA was behind the chemical attack. Look at the footage, also they don't even know what chemical it was.
    Do you like posting conspiracy theories?

  8. #68
    Merely a Setback PACOX's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    26,284
    Quote Originally Posted by Redcrow View Post
    So your saying even though she said "we should do this exact thing" that if she was president she wouldn't have done this exact thing? Or do you seriously believe "she would have had it all worked out by now and there wouldn't have been a chemicals weapon attack to respond to"
    I'm saying there is a huge difference between a thought out plan vs just jumping off the handle before the dust has even settled. Temperament means a lot. Donnies administration just said they were wiping their hands with Syria and he goes an unleashes 60+ missiles on them?

    Resident Cosplay Progressive

  9. #69
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by ranzino View Post
    Ok, nice info.
    if it was not their primary mission then it was just a chance used because the 2 vessels were in the right position, moved a bit closer and off the missiles went ? not much of a plan then.
    The plan is use what you have available to send the message.

  10. #70
    Merely a Setback PACOX's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    26,284
    Quote Originally Posted by ranzino View Post
    Ok, nice info.
    if it was not their primary mission then it was just a chance used because the 2 vessels were in the right position, moved a bit closer and off the missiles went ? not much of a plan then.
    Thats the global strike force that the US pays for.

    Resident Cosplay Progressive

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by Tonkaden View Post
    The Arleigh Burke class destroyers hold 56 tomahawks each...
    No. The class has 96 Mark 41 VLS cells, but what they carry in those cells vary depending on mission.

    There are two major variants of the Arleigh Burke class for all intents and purposes at the moment. There is those that implement the Aegis Combat System and there are those that implement a fork of it, known as the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. They are different.

    Those that implement the Aegis Combat System are typically armed with more Tomahawks and are used more in the land attack role. They also carry more ship-to-ship weapons, and with the SM-2 / SM-6 provide help their Cruiser provide air defense. But their focus in terms of air defense is aircraft, cruise missiles, helicopters, drones and anti-ship missiles.

    A typical loadout of the ACS version is:
    56 TLAMs (Tomahawk land attack missiles)
    24 SM-2MR/SM-6 (air defense missiles)
    24x4 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (quad packed medium range air defensive missiles)
    4 VL ARSOC (anti-Submarine Missiles)



    Those that have the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system have a different radar and different equipment. They carry the larger SM-3 anti-ballistic missile. The SM-3 is not carried by Aegis Combat System ships. Currently about half the fleet has ABMD capability, but this arrived later. Right now the Navy builds every other ship with ABMD support. Why? Because it doesn't need a fleet full of ships carrying SM-3s, to lose the Tomahawk payload. The purpose of this variant is to extend the Aegis Combat System defensive layer against ballistic missiles.

    A typical loadout of the ABMD variant is
    30 TLAM
    30 SM-6
    16 SM-3
    16x4 ESSM
    4 VL ARSOC.

    Since the US used the ABMD variant's TLAM, it would represent a substantial fraction, if not the entirety of their TLAM weapon load, as Kellhound stated.

    If you want to consider something for the sake of contrast, consider the new Zumwalt Class DDG-1000 Destroyer. It has 80 Mark 57 VLS cells. But it doesn't impliment the Aegis Combat System or Aegis Ballistic Missile, and is compatible with neither. It's stealth role is designed for it to be close to short, and congruent with that, it'll carry a much larger number of Tomahawk missiles than your average Aegis Destroyer - perhaps as many as 60. But it'll only carry the SM-6s / SM-2s to defend itself, and not the whole fleet, so as few as 8.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    It's not true.

    http://www.imagesatintl.com/us-strike-syria/

    Success rate seems to be 58 out of 59.

    Which if you think about it entirely makes sense. The US routinely uses precision guided munitions, and they routinely hit the correct target. And all of a sudden it ha has a 60% failure rate when used on Russia's friends? Yeah that's bullshit.

    Also in reference to what you linked, the US probably used the TLAM-E, which has a multimodal seeker. The EW system wouldn't have worked against it. The seeker was designed specifically for that contingency. It could jam radar, or even GPS. It would still have other sensor systems, most self-contained.
    Look at all the close up images and you can see 16 targets only hit and for fun lets say all 16 were double tapped so that 32 where did the other 27 go lmao. Oh btw by 10am this morning SU-22's were already flying in and out of the "DESTROYED" airbase lmao a 100 million dollar fireworks show is all you got.




    Numerous sources from the pentagon said it was Tomahawk E's that were fired which is the latest and greatest.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jedi Batman View Post
    Sounds like a euphemism for real life. We throw money at the rich, in hopes that we will someday be rich, and then we get hookers to piss on us. That's what trickle down economics really is.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    The mix of ordnance depends on the anticipated mission. The ABM ships are loaded for AAW and ABM more so than land attack.
    We were talking about the 2 specific ships that carried out the attack no?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    No. The class has 96 Mark 41 VLS cells, but what they carry in those cells vary depending on mission.

    There are two major variants of the Arleigh Burke class for all intents and purposes at the moment. There is those that implement the Aegis Combat System and there are those that implement a fork of it, known as the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. They are different.

    Those that implement the Aegis Combat System are typically armed with more Tomahawks and are used more in the land attack role. They also carry more ship-to-ship weapons, and with the SM-2 / SM-6 provide help their Cruiser provide air defense. But their focus in terms of air defense is aircraft, cruise missiles, helicopters, drones and anti-ship missiles.

    A typical loadout of the ACS version is:
    56 TLAMs (Tomahawk land attack missiles)
    24 SM-2MR/SM-6 (air defense missiles)
    24x4 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (quad packed medium range air defensive missiles)
    4 VL ARSOC (anti-Submarine Missiles)



    Those that have the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system have a different radar and different equipment. They carry the larger SM-3 anti-ballistic missile. The SM-3 is not carried by Aegis Combat System ships. Currently about half the fleet has ABMD capability, but this arrived later. Right now the Navy builds every other ship with ABMD support. Why? Because it doesn't need a fleet full of ships carrying SM-3s, to lose the Tomahawk payload. The purpose of this variant is to extend the Aegis Combat System defensive layer against ballistic missiles.

    A typical loadout of the ABMD variant is
    30 TLAM
    30 SM-6
    16 SM-3
    16x4 ESSM
    4 VL ARSOC.

    Since the US used the ABMD variant's TLAM, it would represent a substantial fraction, if not the entirety of their TLAM weapon load, as Kellhound stated.

    If you want to consider something for the sake of contrast, consider the new Zumwalt Class DDG-1000 Destroyer. It has 80 Mark 57 VLS cells. But it doesn't impliment the Aegis Combat System or Aegis Ballistic Missile, and is compatible with neither. It's stealth role is designed for it to be close to short, and congruent with that, it'll carry a much larger number of Tomahawk missiles than your average Aegis Destroyer - perhaps as many as 60. But it'll only carry the SM-6s / SM-2s to defend itself, and not the whole fleet, so as few as 8.
    Good to know. Thanks!

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Skandulous View Post
    Look at all the close up images and you can see 16 targets only hit and for fun lets say all 16 were double tapped so that 32 where did the other 27 go lmao. Oh btw by 10am this morning SU-22's were already flying in and out of the "DESTROYED" airbase lmao a 100 million dollar fireworks show is all you got.
    Top image. Count the circles. Or hell, they counted them for you.

    Read better.

  15. #75
    The Unstoppable Force Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    22,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    The plan is use what you have available to send the message.

    What message? Do it again and we will let Russia know we are going to put on a fireworks show?

  16. #76
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Skandulous View Post
    Look at all the close up images and you can see 16 targets only hit and for fun lets say all 16 were double tapped so that 32 where did the other 27 go lmao. Oh btw by 10am this morning SU-22's were already flying in and out of the "DESTROYED" airbase lmao a 100 million dollar fireworks show is all you got.




    Numerous sources from the pentagon said it was Tomahawk E's that were fired which is the latest and greatest.
    ISI has only included a few areas of close-ups, not the entire area.
    The base's ability to perform sustained significant operations is pretty much gone, a handful of sorties is nothing.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Tonkaden View Post
    We were talking about the 2 specific ships that carried out the attack no?

    - - - Updated - - -



    Good to know. Thanks!
    Both ships used are ABM ships.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    What message? Do it again and we will let Russia know we are going to put on a fireworks show?
    We will destroy more infrastructure.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Renewal View Post
    Read something about sarin. The "reports" mentioned mist, and how they got better... with sarin, there would be no mist (no colour, no odour) and next to none witnesses nor survivors.
    It might have been a gas attack, but for sure, not sarin.
    Yep. Sarin gas is colorless and odourless. IF reports are true and people saw mist, it was likely chlorine gas, which looks like this:


    It also seems like reports that describe victims show that sarin was not involved. Sarin is a nerve agent. People die mainly of asphyxiation, partially or completely paralyzed. Vomiting, chemical burns, eye and lung damage - that is chlorine. So basically, as usual, US intelligence confused a military WMD with a substance that is used for industrial purposes and started shooting instead of asking questions. And before anyone asks - chlorine is not too problematic to acquire even in industrial quantities. Many water treatment plants have stockpiles. And sometimes it is used like this:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/22/wo...st/22iraq.html
    BAGHDAD, Feb. 21 2007 — A truck bomb that combined explosives with chlorine gas blew up in southern Baghdad on Wednesday, and officials said it might represent a new and deadly tactic by insurgents against Iraqi civilians.

    It was at least the third truck bomb in a month to employ chlorine, a greenish gas also used in World War I, which burns the skin and can be fatal after only a few concentrated breaths. The bomb killed at least two people and wounded 32 others, many of them sent to hospitals coughing and wheezing, police and medical officials said.
    I wonder if anyone sees similarities and how this can possibly play out...
    Last edited by Gaaz; 2017-04-07 at 09:18 PM.

  18. #78
    The Unstoppable Force Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    22,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    We will destroy more infrastructure.

    Will we? Or will we check with Russia before we attack again? I'm not seeing the message that we will attack without fear of Russian intervention.

  19. #79
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    Will we? Or will we check with Russia before we attack again? I'm not seeing the message that we will attack without fear of Russian intervention.
    We just inflicted significant damage to a base's infrastructure that will have significant limiting effects on the Syrian Air Force's ability to use it for any significant sustained operations.

  20. #80
    The Unstoppable Force Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    22,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    We just inflicted significant damage to a base's infrastructure that will have significant limiting effects on the Syrian Air Force's ability to use it for any significant sustained operations.
    What significant damage was done here? it's already basically operational again.



    If I was Assaad I would be laughing my ass off at the US right now. Pussy Trump can't even attack without checking with Russia first.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •